by Madeleine KandoWe have posted on this subject before but I cannot help myself. I have to voice my own outraged opinion on the subject. The debate over universal health care has awakened in me the socialist beast and it can not be tamed.
I googled ‘Obama socialist’ the other day and found a barrage of ominous looking images that equate Obama with Che Guevara, Mao Tse Tung, Mussolini and worse. There is a ‘socialist witch hunt’ going on in this country. But why? Why is socialism so evil in the American psyche?
I grew up in a period of history where government was supposed to look out for the interests of the ‘little guy’. But with the health care issue on the table it seems that the ‘little guy’ has become so indoctrinated by the right that they are damaging their own cause.
I am beginning to think that Americans are missing the ‘socialist’ gene. They don’t understand the words ‘equality’, ‘social justice’. Even the ‘less fortunate’ don’t take care of themselves because they think they need to uphold ‘American freedom of the individual’ which they feel does not allow for socialist ideas.
Socialist movements have always had a say in shaping the democracies of most European countries. And it has made those democracies better. More affluent, more just. The big bad red wolf has not gobbled them up. None of these democracies have become communist. They are justly called ‘social democracies’. Here were have a ‘liberal democray’. Very liberal. We are free. Free to starve to death, free to die without medical care.
Socialism is not the enemy of freedom. If it were, then Nelson Mandela and Tony Blair would be enemies of freedom. But many Democrats in government have felt the pressure of being branded ‘socialist’ and have thrown in the towel. If I wasn’t so polite I would call them cowards.
Universal health care for all is a worthy social goal. If the price you have to pay is being called a ‘socialist’, so be it. When a good idea goes south because of of a totally misunderstood word that is being abused and manipulated by the Republicans, you should stand up and fight, not be intimidated.leave comment here
6 comments:
Just please move back to Europe, that way you and I will both be happier. You can have the socialist system you want, and I can keep the capitalist free market system I want.
Ha!
I just came back from Europe a few hours ago, and seeing this
"exchange," I can't refrain from jumping into the fray. Just a couple of comments, largely in support of Madeleine:
1) This past week alone, two European coountries had elections in which the socialists won: Greece and Portugal. Does this mean that these two countries are now totalitarian? Of course not. They are as free and as democratic as we are. Whether their socialist economic policies will help them or harm them is another question.
2) As I said in a previous post, "Socialism" is a matter or degree. In America, the Democratic Party is the Socialist Party. It is only mildly socialist.
3) But, hey, maybe the word "socialist" has become hopelessly bastardized in this country, and its meaning here may for ever be incompatible with the way it's used elsewhere, just as Americans use the word "liberal" in a unique and odd way, using it to refer to to the left, whereas elsewhere it usually refers to the pro-business right...
Dear "Anonymous,"
So you think we have a "capitalist free market system?" Think again. We do not. Let's take the Farm Bill as an example. Our government provides billions of dollars in subsidies, funded by the taxpayers, to mega-farms that grow corn. Well, that's actually COMMUNISM. Are you in favor of those subsidies? They drive down the price of corn on the world market, and then the Mexican corn growers can't compete, and they have no choice but to move here. Would you say our taxation system is part of a "free market system?" Then why don't we have control over how our federal income taxes are actually spent? Real capitalism can only function when no single corporation gathers too much power. That's why we need government to break up monopolies, because then we keep competition active. Juts like the board game "Monopoly," when one player buys up all the real estate and every other player is out of money, the game is over! Same thing with our economy. Since the Reagan era, the middle class shrank precisely because of a LACK of government regulation; we have reduced the number of consumers... and then our economy came to a halt. A healthy capitalist free market NEEDS the government to regulate it in order to be sustainable and continue to thrive. Many Americans simply do not understand this!
Americans don't have a "socialist gene" because we still care very much about our founding documents, which present a very compelling case against socialist ideas. When you talk about social justice or taking care of the less fortunate you make it seem as if a person who does not support these things on the national level is somehow immoral or uncivilized. What you don't realize is that political power in America is divided between the states and the federal government and that the further you get away from the local level of government the worse things like democracy and universal healthcare become, it's more chaotic, wasteful and expensive and doesn't tend to solve very many problems (look at big states like California).
I donate money and time to local charities of my choosing and causes that I know where the money goes and I know several of my doctor friends who have provided medical assistance to those in the community with needs.
I just don't want my healthcare run by a bloated, inefficient and wasteful government monopoly, which is what we will have if the government steps out of its role as a referee and gets into the game of providing health insurance. You want cheaper more and better health care? Try having the government break up insurance monopolies that exist within the states. Start there before we make the leap into socialized medicine and trillion dollar deficits that will force my children into a straight jacket of debt.
Why don't Americans like socialism? Because no matter how you slice it, behind the slogans of equality and social justice is the un-American reality that the individual loses the chance to enter into voluntary exchanges that form the basis of a free society.
When the state tells me what I need to support and what I can't eat or think and that I must pay for insurance or be fined then I lose a certain degree of freedom. You may be okay with that but most Americans are not.
"Don't tread on me"
Thanks Algernon for your comment. Here is my response:
Many things that have changed the political climate for the better in America couldn’t have been done on a state level, i.e. Medicare, Social Security. It would have caused a mass exodus of seniors to states that would provide social security benefits.
If you look at the health care system of France, Holland, Denmark, Germany.. even Britain. Their systems are not bloated, they are cheaper and most importantly more ‘just’. Granted, this IS a big country. And states will implement the new law in many different local ways. But the law should be national, don’t you think?
This country is a ‘country’ after all, not a conglomeration of states. I am not saying that the type of social democracy that fits smaller European countries like The Netherlands or Denmark would work here. But I am convinced that Americans would be better off if they thought more as a ‘group’ and not as a conglomeration of ‘individuals.’
I agree with you that there are certain things that the government (local or national) should not intervene in. Abortion for example. That, in my view is such a personal matter that it is nobody’s business but the individuals involved.
Algernon,
If private insurance works so well, then why is our health care system in a state of crisis?
If you've seen all the horror stories from other Americans about private health insurance, you wouldn't conclude it's more efficient and effective than a federally-run program. Without federal rules, what's to stop private companies from rejecting people once they get serious illnesses, or forcing people to pay for their care out-of-pocket -- to the point of financial ruin? This isn't theory. It's what's happening. So why should we have confidence in private corporations' ability to run things fairly and efficiently, when they have proven the opposite?
Besides, federal programs don't have to be "chaotic, wasteful and expensive." The Veterans' Administration (VA) health care system has always been federal, providing far better service than private insurance, at least up until the Bush Administration which let most programs worsen. Vets didn't get rejected for pre-existing conditions, or have to pay out-of-pocket. Likewise, Medicare. Surveys have proven that those with VA insurance or Medicare are more satisfied than most people with private insurance.
Similarly, the Post Office was always federal, and yet it provides very affordable and efficient service. You can send things around the world quickly and cheaply.
And although I certainly commend you for donating to charities, please be aware that not all people are either as generous as you, or in a position like you that makes it possible for them to donate. They either need to keep whatever savings they can, for example to send their kids to college (which should be free like it is in Europe), or they don't earn enough to have anything extra. Voluntary donations don't add up to take care of the needs out there.
It comes down to this: What kind of society do we want to create: a cooperative and caring one, or a competitive and materialistic one? The former is better for us all because we'd have less poverty and less crime; it requires some federal programs. The latter is the direction we've been headed since Reagan; it's based on the assumption that privatizing everything is the solution. Present realities prove otherwise.
Post a Comment
Please limit your comment to 300 words at the most!